Search
Search results
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jun 12, 2019
The underwater eye candy made it a fun watch!
I knew there was a reason a bought a 75" television. It is for movies like Aquaman. Ok fine, the screenplay isn't very good at times and I did not enjoy some of Aquaman's one liners, although I do not know if that is true to the comic character or not.
Having not known much about the character other than what has already appeared in the collective recent DCU films, I was eager to learn more about his origins and his universe.
His mother escapes her arranged marriage by coming to the surface and meeting a lighthouse keeper whom she grows to love and has their child. He will grow up to be the Atlantian who should be king but does not want the responsibility.
The film reminded me a lot of a Thor movie at times, just this time under water instead of an Asgard realm bereft with creatures big and small.
The real star of this was the underwater realm itself. The lighting, glowing and use of color was unlike any movie released to date I have seen and that says a lot. The visuals were not only groundbreaking and striking in their depth and complexity (which normally I rip on CGI puke movies), but served to compliment the actors and story in symbiosis.
I couldn't believe the number of negative reviews on IMDb for this film (although haters gotta hate everything these days). I think you can look past a little corny dialogue and let yourself get lost within the visual splendor that is Aquaman!
Having not known much about the character other than what has already appeared in the collective recent DCU films, I was eager to learn more about his origins and his universe.
His mother escapes her arranged marriage by coming to the surface and meeting a lighthouse keeper whom she grows to love and has their child. He will grow up to be the Atlantian who should be king but does not want the responsibility.
The film reminded me a lot of a Thor movie at times, just this time under water instead of an Asgard realm bereft with creatures big and small.
The real star of this was the underwater realm itself. The lighting, glowing and use of color was unlike any movie released to date I have seen and that says a lot. The visuals were not only groundbreaking and striking in their depth and complexity (which normally I rip on CGI puke movies), but served to compliment the actors and story in symbiosis.
I couldn't believe the number of negative reviews on IMDb for this film (although haters gotta hate everything these days). I think you can look past a little corny dialogue and let yourself get lost within the visual splendor that is Aquaman!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Black Panther (2018) in Movies
Mar 5, 2018 (Updated Mar 5, 2018)
Cool For Cats
Marvel's latest hotly anticipated superhero epic Black Panther, has arrived. Chadwick Boseman stars as the titular hero and gives a subdued, collected performance, which I didn't expect. The first time that we saw this character was in Civil War and while I understand he was on a revenge quest in that movie, he conveyed an sense of energy that is isn't present in Black Panther. I don't think that this was Chadwick Boseman's decision, but is instead based on what Ryan Coogler's vision of who Black Panther should be.
There are a lot of stand out performances in the film though Michael B Jordan, who is a Coogler movie staple at this point, brings us the best Marvel villain so far, or at the very least, the most believable motivation for doing villainous things that we have seen so far in the MCU. The rest of the cast bring their A game too, including Danai Guira, Lupita Nyong’o, Andy Serkis, Daniel Kaluuya, Forest Whittaker, Martin Freeman and Sterling K Brown.
The costume design and sets where fantastic to look at, but some of the character CGI looked a but too bouncy and unrealistic. I also felt like the movie dragged a bit in the second act. While the soundtrack started off great and added to the excitement of certain scenes in the movie's first act, by around halfway through the movie, I was sick of hearing African drums and chanting.
Overall though, this is a pretty great entry into the MCU and although it isn't Marvel's best ever, it is also definitely not their worst.
There are a lot of stand out performances in the film though Michael B Jordan, who is a Coogler movie staple at this point, brings us the best Marvel villain so far, or at the very least, the most believable motivation for doing villainous things that we have seen so far in the MCU. The rest of the cast bring their A game too, including Danai Guira, Lupita Nyong’o, Andy Serkis, Daniel Kaluuya, Forest Whittaker, Martin Freeman and Sterling K Brown.
The costume design and sets where fantastic to look at, but some of the character CGI looked a but too bouncy and unrealistic. I also felt like the movie dragged a bit in the second act. While the soundtrack started off great and added to the excitement of certain scenes in the movie's first act, by around halfway through the movie, I was sick of hearing African drums and chanting.
Overall though, this is a pretty great entry into the MCU and although it isn't Marvel's best ever, it is also definitely not their worst.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Victor Frankenstein (2015) in Movies
Feb 25, 2018 (Updated Feb 25, 2018)
I, Igor
If you're one of those people who thinks that the story of Frankenstein pays far too much attention to him actually making the monster, and not enough to the details and ups-and-downs of his relationship with Igor the hunchback, then this is the film for you (although if that's your attitude, you really don't deserve Frankenstein movies at all). Deformed circus clown becomes brilliant self-taught surgeon and anatomist, is rescued by unconventional medical student, gets put to work stitching.
James McAvoy could have been a great Frankenstein, but not with a script like this one - narration keeps banging on about how familiar we all are with this story, before going off into new and wildly eccentric territory - Igor has a romance with a trapeze artist, there are problems with steampunk zombie chimps, etc. Actual creation of famous monster only happens in last ten minutes. Film has zero feeling for historical setting (a version of Victorian London where nobody bats an eyelid if your name is Igor or Frankenstein).
All the major themes of Shelley's story are basically sidelined in favour of overwrought emotional drama. Best thing in it is possibly Andrew Scott as a detective looking to bust Dr F for interfering with zoo animals; his scenes with McAvoy are actually pretty interesting. The kind of film that seems to be afraid the audience will get bored and wander away if there isn't an outbreak of slow-mo or CGI or whatever every five minutes. How does Max Landis manage to keep selling scripts like this one? Moderately good-looking but a massive waste of potential.
James McAvoy could have been a great Frankenstein, but not with a script like this one - narration keeps banging on about how familiar we all are with this story, before going off into new and wildly eccentric territory - Igor has a romance with a trapeze artist, there are problems with steampunk zombie chimps, etc. Actual creation of famous monster only happens in last ten minutes. Film has zero feeling for historical setting (a version of Victorian London where nobody bats an eyelid if your name is Igor or Frankenstein).
All the major themes of Shelley's story are basically sidelined in favour of overwrought emotional drama. Best thing in it is possibly Andrew Scott as a detective looking to bust Dr F for interfering with zoo animals; his scenes with McAvoy are actually pretty interesting. The kind of film that seems to be afraid the audience will get bored and wander away if there isn't an outbreak of slow-mo or CGI or whatever every five minutes. How does Max Landis manage to keep selling scripts like this one? Moderately good-looking but a massive waste of potential.
Fred (860 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Jul 26, 2018
Flash, Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman, Aquaman, Cyborg (3 more)
Steppenwolf is great!
Action was great
Story was good
Horrendous special effects. Cyborg looks terrible. (1 more)
Dialogue was iffy
Was surprised by this one. It's good!
I have to admit. Most time I avoid reviews of movies, because quite frankly, they may affect my feelings towards a film. However, I heard only bad things about Justice League & was totally going to skip it, considering what I did hear about it & my disappointment with the recent string of superhero films. So, when a friend of mine said it was actually good, I gave it a shot. I'm happy I did.
The film is very good. Not great, but when put up against Wonder Woman, Black Panther & Superman v Batman, it shines.
The chemistry between the actors is great. They really come across as a team, unlike the Avengers. The new guys are great! Flash is funny, as he should be. Aquaman is a badass, because if he wasn't, he'd be boring "Superfriends" Aquaman. And Cyborg, well...Cyborg let's just say, is a great character & acted well, but special effects that bring his body to life aren't so...special. He looks out of place, like a cartoon put against a real background. When he moves his head, it floats around on his neck. It's not just one time, but every time. And the end battle takes place in a CGI town that looks worse than the first season of Beast Wars:Transformers.
But I can overlook that, because besides the flaws, we got a fun film to watch. And stay after the credits. You won't be disappointed.
The film is very good. Not great, but when put up against Wonder Woman, Black Panther & Superman v Batman, it shines.
The chemistry between the actors is great. They really come across as a team, unlike the Avengers. The new guys are great! Flash is funny, as he should be. Aquaman is a badass, because if he wasn't, he'd be boring "Superfriends" Aquaman. And Cyborg, well...Cyborg let's just say, is a great character & acted well, but special effects that bring his body to life aren't so...special. He looks out of place, like a cartoon put against a real background. When he moves his head, it floats around on his neck. It's not just one time, but every time. And the end battle takes place in a CGI town that looks worse than the first season of Beast Wars:Transformers.
But I can overlook that, because besides the flaws, we got a fun film to watch. And stay after the credits. You won't be disappointed.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Walking Dead - Season 8 in TV
Dec 23, 2019
Season 8 of The Walking Dead is where the show completely lost me for a good while.
I slowly limped through the first half of it, and had to literally talk myself into watching the next episode.
The main reason for this is just how painfully boring it's all is.
The much anticipated 'All Out War' storyline from the comic series is in full swing, after being set up through season 7, and every episode feels like it's just uninspired gun fight after uninspired gun fight. Any episodes in the past seasons that featured this kind of action felt exciting and tense. It happened rarely so was impactful when they came along.
Here, it just feels a lot like dead weight.
I also felt the writers saw TWD as a much artier project than it actually is at this point - there only so much of main characters staring deeply into the horizon, or at the sun that I care to watch.
Even character deaths feel dragged out and testing and so many
of the gory practical effects have been replaced by sub par CGI now, that it just doesn't even warrant a reaction. It's a sad state of affairs.
It's not all bad, I guess? All of the acting talent are still stellar, they're just not being given much to do. Although the Negan storyline failed to light up the small screen for me, I still enjoy him as a character, and JDM as an actor. There are still some entertaining set pieces strewn throughout, but the overall experience is a shadow of it's former self.
I slowly limped through the first half of it, and had to literally talk myself into watching the next episode.
The main reason for this is just how painfully boring it's all is.
The much anticipated 'All Out War' storyline from the comic series is in full swing, after being set up through season 7, and every episode feels like it's just uninspired gun fight after uninspired gun fight. Any episodes in the past seasons that featured this kind of action felt exciting and tense. It happened rarely so was impactful when they came along.
Here, it just feels a lot like dead weight.
I also felt the writers saw TWD as a much artier project than it actually is at this point - there only so much of main characters staring deeply into the horizon, or at the sun that I care to watch.
Even character deaths feel dragged out and testing and so many
of the gory practical effects have been replaced by sub par CGI now, that it just doesn't even warrant a reaction. It's a sad state of affairs.
It's not all bad, I guess? All of the acting talent are still stellar, they're just not being given much to do. Although the Negan storyline failed to light up the small screen for me, I still enjoy him as a character, and JDM as an actor. There are still some entertaining set pieces strewn throughout, but the overall experience is a shadow of it's former self.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Mortal Engines (2018) in Movies
Dec 17, 2018
Pretty good, but with a few issues
I've been wanting to see this since the first trailer was released, and I'm pleased to say it's actually quite good.
The visuals and CGI are very good, the traction cities and towns look fantastic and they're impressively done. Shouldn't be a surprise considering these have been done by Weta. The plot itself is intriguing and fairly unique as far as apocalyptic futures go, although there are a few plot points that are a bit cliched and reminiscent of other sci-fi/fantasy films - the whole final act/ending being the main example.
Hester Shaw is a very strong heroine and a good lead character, although i think she suffers from some bad scripting. Hugo Weaving is doing his Agent Smith best as the villainous Thaddeus Valentine, he really does know how to play a good bad guy. I'm most impressed however with Robert Sheehan. He's a very underrated actor yet seems to have such range and versatility, from his start in the series Misfits to the creepy Vladek in Fortitude, and then his turn as the dashing hero in this, he really made this film worth watching even if the script wasn't always in his favour. The romance aspect of this film too is also a little too forced and not very subtle, and a little bit predictable.
In short this is an interesting story with a great cast and special effects, that is let down by a patchy script and a few cliches. The next book I have to read is this one, so I'm interested to see how the two compare.
The visuals and CGI are very good, the traction cities and towns look fantastic and they're impressively done. Shouldn't be a surprise considering these have been done by Weta. The plot itself is intriguing and fairly unique as far as apocalyptic futures go, although there are a few plot points that are a bit cliched and reminiscent of other sci-fi/fantasy films - the whole final act/ending being the main example.
Hester Shaw is a very strong heroine and a good lead character, although i think she suffers from some bad scripting. Hugo Weaving is doing his Agent Smith best as the villainous Thaddeus Valentine, he really does know how to play a good bad guy. I'm most impressed however with Robert Sheehan. He's a very underrated actor yet seems to have such range and versatility, from his start in the series Misfits to the creepy Vladek in Fortitude, and then his turn as the dashing hero in this, he really made this film worth watching even if the script wasn't always in his favour. The romance aspect of this film too is also a little too forced and not very subtle, and a little bit predictable.
In short this is an interesting story with a great cast and special effects, that is let down by a patchy script and a few cliches. The next book I have to read is this one, so I'm interested to see how the two compare.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Sharknado 2: The Second One (2014) in Movies
Jan 13, 2020 (Updated May 7, 2020)
Shitenado
One (sort of) positive thing that I will say about Sharknado 2 is that it's delightfully absurd. You will ask yourself frequently why on Earth you're still watching but will perhaps find that you can't look away.
The first Sharknado thought that it was so bad it was good, when in reality l, it is 100% shit. Sharknado 2 on the other hand, is only 99% shit. During the opening scene set on a plane, I found myself thinking 'I wonder what this would be like with a full Hollywood budget'... This was around the point that Tara Reid was hanging out of said plane, and attempted to gun down a shark flying though the air with a small handgun, before having her hand bitten off, and exclaiming that the shark knew who she was, and was purposefully targeting her. That's pretty much what were dealing with here.
The special effects are offensively awful. The 'money-shot' of the main character sawing a shark in half with a chainsaw whilst stood on top of a car is the only relatively decent use if CGI in the whole movie, and it's clear that most of the effects budget was spent on it. Pretty sure all the rest of effects are just cut and pasted from the first one.
There's also a weird rain filter applied to a lot of the film, to give the effect of stormy weather... But the characters are bone dry for the whole thing....
For what it's worth, Sharknado 2 partially achieves it's desire to be really really silly, which is a slight improvement on the tediousness of the first one - still rubbish though.
The first Sharknado thought that it was so bad it was good, when in reality l, it is 100% shit. Sharknado 2 on the other hand, is only 99% shit. During the opening scene set on a plane, I found myself thinking 'I wonder what this would be like with a full Hollywood budget'... This was around the point that Tara Reid was hanging out of said plane, and attempted to gun down a shark flying though the air with a small handgun, before having her hand bitten off, and exclaiming that the shark knew who she was, and was purposefully targeting her. That's pretty much what were dealing with here.
The special effects are offensively awful. The 'money-shot' of the main character sawing a shark in half with a chainsaw whilst stood on top of a car is the only relatively decent use if CGI in the whole movie, and it's clear that most of the effects budget was spent on it. Pretty sure all the rest of effects are just cut and pasted from the first one.
There's also a weird rain filter applied to a lot of the film, to give the effect of stormy weather... But the characters are bone dry for the whole thing....
For what it's worth, Sharknado 2 partially achieves it's desire to be really really silly, which is a slight improvement on the tediousness of the first one - still rubbish though.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Legend of Tarzan (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
It’s a story we’re pretty much all familiar with – Tarzan, a man who was raised in the jungle by apes that took him in as a baby after his parents died.
In “The Legend of Tarzan,” it is the 1880’s and royal corruption brews beneath the surface. Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard), now an adult, is living as John Clayton III, Lord Greystoke with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie).
His civilized life is interrupted when he is sent back to the Congo as a trade emissary. Unfortunately, he is at the center of the wicked plans of Captain Léon Rom (Christoph Waltz). Rom has made a deal to trade Tarzan in exchange for diamonds to a tribal chief who plans to butcher and eat him. Waltz does a great job playing a sleazy political criminal with beady eyes and a greasy mustache.
Samuel L. Jackson is also fun to watch as George Washington Williams, who accompanies Tarzan to the Congo when he follows up on his own suspicions.
While the film is quite enjoyable, and very pretty to look at (special thanks to Skarsgard). Tarzan isn’t as animalistic as you would expect, Jane lacks authentic emotion, and at times the CGI is a bit low quality.
“The Legend of Tarzan” is one of those short, sweet, and fun summer movies and is definitely worth watching. With political undertones of greed, slavery, and human destruction, it also has deeper value.
This is one that everyone can watch. It’s not too violent, it’s not to edgy, and it’s not too long. I give “The Legend of Tarzan” 3.5 out of 5 stars.
In “The Legend of Tarzan,” it is the 1880’s and royal corruption brews beneath the surface. Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgard), now an adult, is living as John Clayton III, Lord Greystoke with his wife Jane (Margot Robbie).
His civilized life is interrupted when he is sent back to the Congo as a trade emissary. Unfortunately, he is at the center of the wicked plans of Captain Léon Rom (Christoph Waltz). Rom has made a deal to trade Tarzan in exchange for diamonds to a tribal chief who plans to butcher and eat him. Waltz does a great job playing a sleazy political criminal with beady eyes and a greasy mustache.
Samuel L. Jackson is also fun to watch as George Washington Williams, who accompanies Tarzan to the Congo when he follows up on his own suspicions.
While the film is quite enjoyable, and very pretty to look at (special thanks to Skarsgard). Tarzan isn’t as animalistic as you would expect, Jane lacks authentic emotion, and at times the CGI is a bit low quality.
“The Legend of Tarzan” is one of those short, sweet, and fun summer movies and is definitely worth watching. With political undertones of greed, slavery, and human destruction, it also has deeper value.
This is one that everyone can watch. It’s not too violent, it’s not to edgy, and it’s not too long. I give “The Legend of Tarzan” 3.5 out of 5 stars.
Hidden in Plain Sight: An Archaeology of Magic and the Cinema
Book
What does it mean to deWhat does it mean to describe cinematic effects as "movie magic," to compare...
George Lucas
Book
George Lucas by Brian Jay Jones is the first comprehensive telling of the story of the iconic...